It is indeed most "in character" for WX-78 to be the traitor, but is it as narratively satisfying as, say, Wagstaff? Or even Winona?
Having a tension-building moment where WX is being offered something in exchange for being a traitor would be great, but they would probably refuse as the forces of evil have been duplicitous in the past, and WX would surely remember that and go SCREW OFF, SHADY STRANGER.
Wagstaff would be interesting because it wouldn't be wholly unexpected of his character, and there could be DRAMA if he was, like, Wilson's mentor figure or something. Also, he'd use what power he attains to do some very interesting and probably dangerous/outright scary experiments. Maxwell had a few clockworks, but imagine what crazy Fuel-infused machines and tech Wagstaff would develop! He'd make a neat villain, being a more direct parallel to Wilson than Maxwell, and possibly crazier than both.
Winona would have to be thoroughly tricked. Example: T:"Get us this thing and you'll see Charlie again." W:"What will happen to the others?" T:"They'll be fine" (but more convincing/nuanced than that). Then there'd be a whole arc wherein she has to figure out how to amend her mistake, and risk her own life in doing so. She's too friendly to just... drop everyone else in the face of temptation, unless the reward was REALLY huge and she had no idea what the consequences would actually be.
Wes... well, memes and all, but Wes is definitely more self-sacrificial. It would certainly be more of an emotional moment if Wes were to die than embrace the dark side.
Of course, DS/T is a video game and not a film or novel, so these theories don't necessarily apply.

One thing to properly responding to counterexamples to your argument is the logical accuracy of your supporting statements.
Yes, you may have followed standard procedure like quoting and addressing the points you answered, but most of the counterexamples you provided (Nitre has an ugly texture, it is annoying/Moonstone and marble game functionally could very well be the same item) provide little logical reason to refute the counterarguments presented.
An example which immediately comes to mind is this:
Someone posted this valid concern:
And you responded with:
Not only did you present a flawed argument (Moonstone looks like Marble, Moonstone functions like marble; therefore, Moonstone IS Marble) but you also had the gall to state your hatred about the counterargument.
And what makes it amusing to me is that you decided to agree with this line of thought later on.
I suggested to lock the thread because this discussion had nothing more useful to offer, not because some people disagreed to your original topic. There is nothing more to give or add to the original topic.
What is more, most of the previous disagreements like:
were logical, valid and not posted out of hate, but out of logical response to your argument and your following counterarguments, which are honestly flawed. These responses aimed to show you the flaws in your argument ("Useless items need to be removed/replaced") and state counterexamples ("Nitre has plenty of important uses e.g. Endothermic fires" / "Stingers need to be expanded upon, especially in light of the new DLC where they are used in Boat Patches" / "Moon Rocks and Marble are two functionally different items") to refute your claim.
And though indeed lots of responses became highly insulting, overblown and satirical, locking the thread would halt them altogether... honestly though, guys. Why pick on the poor guy like this?

So many good names. Infact, it gave me an idea. Every 3-5 servers I'm gonna swap names so people wont recognize me.
"That's XxXB4$EDE$TROYR666XxX!!! They're a troll! Kick them!!!!!"
I will have a new name eveytime you see me, but the skin will be the same: A victorian Willow terrorizing the servers.
I had a few funny things happen to me while I used some of these names, but I'm not sure if I should post them here or make a separate journal. If I make it separate I may get warnings or bans because I'm literally admittedly trolling.
Also, I lied. I'm not helping anyone. I'm just trolling. Forgive.
But that beings said. I need moar names! There's plenty of weekend left to spare!

This bug is linked to IThresholdSwitch rather than a specific sensor. As a result it affects all sensors using IThresholdSwitch (temperature, hydro, germs etc) as well as all mod created sensors relying on IThresholdSwitch.

I have a question on this, so I broke into the oil biome and saw one in vacuum, so carefully kept that vacuum until I could dig it up. I left the seed there but now notice there is a small amount of zombie spores in the oil in that area. Not in the vacuum but in the oil. Does it multiply in liquid like food poisoning does? Does it spread from oil to gas? Will it spread from the oil to pipes etc if I pipe it to burn? At what temp does it either freeze or boil dead?

I find it more useful to set it to 7 as it's an "above" sensor. Then again, I use it to turn things like my Pez dispenser and incubators off instead of turning on conveyor loaders for the extra eggs.
7 will activate when the ranch is full.
8 will activate when the ranch is overcrowded.

If you have two telelocator focus set up in a world, and If you stand in the center of one of said Telelocator Focus, when you use the Telelocator Staff to teleport yourself, you won't teleport to the focus you're currently under. Instead, you will teleport to the opposite Telelocator Focus.
This lets essentially make your own custom, two-way wormhole, in exchange for purple gems. It's probably been in the game since forever, but the UI didn't give any hint that this was possible, unlike Wagstaff's Telipad (I've asked around and some people knew about it).
This is what I mean if you don't get it:
I originally learnt of it from reddit:

I don't think WX is as likely to turn on the rest of the group as their evil robot attitude would suggest, because even if they don't have any fondness or sympathy towards the others or consider them worth respecting as people, they should be able to do the math and conclude that they're better off with the other survivors as allies than enemies. (And that however highly they think of themself in comparison to any given fleshling, they can't fight off a dozen-plus fleshlings, most of whom are supernaturally empowered, working together to defeat them.)
Maxwell I think has legitimately learned his lesson from his stint as evil puppetmaster of the Constant and is trying to redeem himself (even though he still has an oversized ego), so I'm not really worried about him being more likely to coldheartedly sell out the rest of the survivors than anybody else. I think he also knows that he'd be toast if he betrayed them and they lived to tell about it, both for the reasons I laid out re: WX and because while some of the survivors might have forgiven him for what he did on the Throne others have only put their grudges aside because he's a valuable contributor to group survival now and helps them even when he doesn't get anything out of it; they wouldn't give him a third chance. On the one hand I could see him compromising his morality if he was desperate enough but on the other hand he seems like one of the least likely people to trust that the powers he made that deal with would keep their word.
Wortox tends to take the welfare of the group less seriously than everybody else because it is less serious for him; he can leave this realm entirely if surviving in it stops being fun. However, he does have a moral compass - his whole introduction was about how there are lines he won't cross for a laugh - so I don't think he's likely to stab his friends in the back just for fun. I could see him believing he was only playing a mean prank and not realising how badly he'd screwed everyone else over, though; just look at his firestarter lines.
Wagstaff strikes me as naïve about the dangers posed by nightmare fuel, shadow magic, and Them, rather than knowing everything the playerbase has pieced together about the risks (or more) and not caring what happens to him or to anyone else if he gets what he wants. I don't think he's as selfish as some people have interpreted him. But having said that, he craves arcane knowledge and power with worrying intensity and already disregards his own safety pursuing them, so he seems like the most likely to betray the group because of some external figure offering a deal rather than just out of opportunistic self-interest.
Wendy seems to enjoy small-scale cruelty and destruction, sees little value in living, and would do almost anything to preserve or resurrect Abigail, so I think it's reasonable to be worried about her. Despite that, she cares about the other survivors (judging by things like her quotes for player ghosts) and unlike Maxwell/WX/Wagstaff doesn't seem like she craves power in general. I could maybe see her trading everyone else for Abigail but I'm not convinced she'd actually go through with it, especially with Webber among the people she was sacrificing. I don't think she's the one we should be most worried about.
Woodlegs is a pirate captain, so he's used to stealing what he wants from other people and killing anybody who tries to stop him from doing that, but that doesn't mean he has no sense of loyalty at all. I don't think he'd betray his own crew for just any prize or he'd have been killed in a mutiny by now, but it's hard to say whether he'd sell them out for the right price or if he'd stand by them at any cost as long as they were equally loyal to him. (If he didn't see the other survivors as his crew he'd probably sell them out for a cheese sandwich, but I'm assuming this is a scenario where they've all bonded with each other and worked together for a while.)
I actually voted for WX (I don't think they'd betray the others over petty things or at the first opportunity, but I could still more easily see them than any other DST character selling the group out), but now that I've written all of this I feel like I should have picked Wagstaff.

I think the easiest way is to change the appearance.
SetBuild() on the prefab will change how it looks.
AddPrefabPostInit("prefabname", function(inst)
inst:SetBuild("buildname")
end)
According to deciduoustrees.lua, there're 5 types of trees. "deciduoustree_normal", "deciduoustree_tall", "deciduoustree_short", "deciduoustree_burnt, "deciduoustree_stump". So each one you override the build will change their appearance.
If changing their appearance is not what you want, you can do something like this.
AddPrefabPostInit("prefabname", function(inst)
if not GLOBAL.TheWorld.ismastersim then return end
GLOBAL.SpawnPrefab("saptree").Transform:SetPosition(inst.Transform:GetWorldPosition())
inst:Remove()
end)
Spawn an alternative prefab and move to where the original prefab is and remove the original.
But if you do this in deciduoustrees, world's regrowth system will consider the original trees have been removed and should be planted.
Which may cause the endless spawn of deciduoustrees. I'm not sure though. Maybe you need to tweak the world regrowth system as well in this case.
Maybe better ways exist, so don't give up finding a better way.

- if you need to feed a bird during the night, take it out of the birdcage and place it back in. It will be awake enough for you to feed it 4-6 times before it sleeps again. Then repeat the process as desired.

tbh I don't think the forgetfulness mechanic is a good pairing for Wicker from a gameplay perspective.
She struggles with sanity the most due to large sanity pool and casually forgetting recipes would in a large part make her only downside even more trivial that it is rn, cuz she can recover her recipes very easily with crafting stations and a large chunk of sanity.
IMO it doesn't make for an exciting mechanic, it would be rather annoying and boring and, most importantly, against her character design...

You can think what you like as can I. When I read it I knew immediately what the OPs intention was. It wasn't to give her a disease but to give her a forgetful mechanic. Besides, when it comes to random diseases that precedent has already been set.
I have and continue to agree that using Alzheimer's was a poor choice but sometimes intentions truly do matter. I am sympathetic to those who have had first hand experience with it but I also have empathy for the person being unfairly scolded.
As for lore I don't see the same conflict that you do. Time does indeed exist in the Constant. There is very clearly a day night cycle and a seasonal progression. Both of those things require the concept of Time. You can argue one doesn't age in the Constant, and you would be correct, but that does not require the absence of Time.
Wicker is the librarian. Presumably her vast knowledge comes from reading copious amounts of books during her tenure as said librarian. An extremely small percentage of human beings can truly claim to remember everything they've ever read. Sometimes something has to be read again to be remembered. In the Constant Wicker no longer has access to her library. In order to maintain her knowledge her mind will occasionally let go of information she has learned while there. Better to lose information learned with a device you have access to rather than a book you may never see again.
Now I am not saying I want this mechanic. Honestly I don't think it adds anything fun to the game not does it really make anything more difficult but it is an interesting idea.
I think creativityshould be encouraged. Ideas should be discussed in a civil manner. The pros and cons should be thoughtfully weighed. People shouldn't be immediately attacked because someone doesn't like their idea.

All boats driven to land with dense turf or beard rug turf instantly break when the boat makes contact with the shore of these turf. The boat will break and the player will be ejected onto the water before snapping back to land.

If you look back I did actually respond properly. I see almost none else quoting me while I quote many responses and address points answered. Any example how I not address point properly? This response is example of me properly address point you made!
So locking thread because people disagree? Love this forum. Hate idea, bombard topic with satiric hate and then have thread lock from it "got out of hand". Good job you got what you wanted. You should not have the power to do so if that is how this happens. Some admin need take note of what people do and instead of lock thread to throw out idea, make people stop doing this. I started constructively this topic, lot of people who respond to me are at fault for making topic look bad.
If people actually made good argument against idea, people would not throw angry sarcasm at topic. It just shows you don't like idea (not you specifically GetNerfedOn), have no good arguments, then take ``roasting`` approach that is completely not constructive. Not believe me? Look back at some responses in this topic.